Hi again,
I still know I'm late but there are two more points:
draft-welzl-ecn-benefits-02 says:
"Network devices must not drop
packets solely because these codepoints are used [RFC2309.bis]"
and
"A network device should therefore not
remark an ECT(0) or ECT(1) mark to zero [RFC2309.bis]."
I could not find this recommendation in draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-11, at
least not in the section 4.2.1 (AQM and ECN), but it should be in there (and
should actually say: a network device MUST NOT remark, ECT(0), ETC(1) or CE to
zero)...?
Mirja
On 23.04.2015 13:19, Mirja Kühlewind wrote:
Hi all,
I know I'm too late for this but want to bring it up anyway:
draft-ietf-aqm-recommendation-11 currently says:
"An AQM algorithm that supports ECN needs to define the threshold and
algorithm for ECN-marking. This threshold MAY differ from that used
for dropping packets that are not marked as ECN-capable, and SHOULD
be configurable."
But I think it should be:
"An AQM algorithm that supports ECN needs to define the parameters and
algorithm for ECN-marking. These parameters MAY differ from that used
for dropping packets that are not marked as ECN-capable, and SHOULD
be configurable."
so just s/threshold/parameters/ ...?
I've just caught this now because I'm reading draft-welzl-ecn-benefits-02;
sorry. Maybe it's still possible to make such a small edit... if other people
think as well that this should be changed...?
Mirja
_______________________________________________
aqm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
--
------------------------------------------
Dipl.-Ing. Mirja Kühlewind
Communication Systems Group
Institute TIK, ETH Zürich
Gloriastrasse 35, 8092 Zürich, Switzerland
Room ETZ G93
phone: +41 44 63 26932
email: [email protected]
------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
aqm mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/aqm
